Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility
Date
Msg-id 20180326054354.GB2759@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility  (Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 11:27:31PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> AdvanceXLInsertBuffer() does quite a bit, so I'm a bit surprised to see
> this simply removing that call, you're confident there's nothing done
> which still needs doing..?

Have a look at BKP_REMOVABLE then.  This was moved to page headers in
2dd9322, still it seems to me that the small benefits outlined on this
thread don't justify breaking tools relying on this flag set, especially
if there is no replacement for it.

So I would vote to not commit this patch.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: PQHost() undefined behavior if connecting string contains bothhost and hostaddr types
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: file cloning in pg_upgrade and CREATE DATABASE